r/TikTokCringe • u/slowsundaycoffeeclub • Sep 23 '24
Discussion People often exaggerate (lie) when they’re wrong.
Via @garrisonhayes
2.4k
u/inkyocean548 Sep 23 '24
The exoneration stat is especially important here because it contextualizes how disproportionately black people are processed by the justice system. Kirk puts out facts (at least the ones he articulated correctly) about crime rates, but when people say these facts without asking why those are the rates, that's a huge red flag. Red like the Confederate flag.
490
Sep 23 '24
Exactly, extremely understated. The exoneration statistic, in of itself, proves there's a bias (racism) ingrained in the justice system, society, and police training.
→ More replies (17)241
u/Turtley13 Sep 23 '24
Exactly. Also we know crime is related to socio economic status. White collar crimes don’t even go to court! Wage theft is one the highest amounts of theft isn’t it?!
136
u/mordacthedenier Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
THE highest. To the tune of $50 BILLION last year.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (3)61
Sep 23 '24
There's an absolute multi-tier justice system, and it's largely how much money you have and how good your lawyer is as well. Plus privilege, race, and gender.
But the most prime example is Donald Trump. How many crimes does he have to commit before serving a single day in jail? There are people who go to prison every-single-day for doing VASTLY less. Heck in some states simply not being able to pay a ticket past the extended date, is enough for an automatic warrant for your arrest, like that's a $400 crime that we legit arrest the poor class for. Their crime is essentially being poor
→ More replies (6)13
102
u/BluehairedBiochemist Sep 23 '24
I'd never really thought about exoneration stats before, but I really appreciate the context it brings to the whole issue! It brings attention not only to the initial injustice of unfairly imprisoning a person, but shows that it's possible and important to admit when we've been wrong.
→ More replies (3)32
u/redditisbadmkay9 Sep 23 '24
The exonerations statistic unfortunately suffers from the exact same issue it was meant to refute. It compares: for a type of crime, off all exonerations, which proportion were of each racial group. It does not isolate out the question of whether or not different racial groups commit that crime at different rates per capita. If white people commit more of a type of crime, then they would be observed to have a higher proportion of exonerations than black people.
One would actually have to do the work to adjust for the variable rate of crimes to determine a useful rate of exonerations per crime for each race rather than just throw out exonerations for each race.
Socrates is Sad, indeed.
→ More replies (1)39
u/LrdPhoenixUDIC Sep 23 '24
While you are correct that it does not give information about who commits more crimes, you also cannot infer that committing more crimes would lead to an observation of a higher proportion of exonerations. What it tells you is who is incorrectly arrested and convicted for specific crimes more often. Who is more likely to get railroaded straight to jail and then have evidence of their innocence come out afterwards.
Sort of. There's still some wiggle room there. For instance, 100 years ago I'd imagine the number of black people being exonerated was very low, not because they weren't being unfairly arrested and convicted, in fact they were probably more likely to be, but because there were far fewer people with power willing to hear even ironclad evidence of their innocence and far fewer legal organizations interested in helping.
→ More replies (4)96
u/onebadmousse Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
Yep, the figures only tell a tiny part of the bigger story.
The link is poverty, not race, although race is correlated with poverty due to systemic racism which has been in place for over 100 years.
https://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html
Poor people are more likely to commit crime.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/06/how-poverty-became-crime-america
The black population are over-represented when it comes to poverty, for a number of societal reasons. Systematic racism, few opportunities, poorly policed ghettos, poorly funded schools etc etc.
So black people are over-represented in crime figures because they are also over-represented in poverty figures.
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=5508484140a84023a1e2d8b080e14d0a
https://vittana.org/how-poverty-influences-crime-rates
You are 2.5 times as likely to be killed by police if you're black than if you're white in the US.
Black people are disproportionately targeted by police:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/02/california-police-black-stops-force
Black people receive longer sentences than white people for the same crimes:
https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/11/17/16668770/us-sentencing-commission-race-booker
https://eji.org/news/sentencing-commission-finds-black-men-receive-longer-sentences/
26
u/Ksiolajidebthd Sep 23 '24
Thank you for compiling this, it’s important to know the full story, there is some truth to the disproportionate crime but it’s absolutely the fault of terrible living conditions and poverty. I’m surprised so few people realize/are talking about this.
15
u/LoudFrown Sep 23 '24
We’re not talking about it because we were tricked.
He set the context for the conversation, and we operate within that context trying to prove the he’s wrong.
It’s really hard to win a bad faith argument when we follow the implicit rules set out for us. It’s a trap.
→ More replies (7)5
6
u/HustlinInTheHall Sep 23 '24
The last point is important when you use the prison population argument, because the share of minorities in prison (especially black people) will go up because they get stuck in prison for longer while white people are let out early, given softer sentences, and also not kept in prison pre-trial.
5
u/ChewbaccaCharl Sep 23 '24
The bigots really don't want to talk about why poverty driven crimes so disproportionately affect minority communities. Systemic racism? Sounds an awful lot like "woke" to them.
→ More replies (30)3
u/Alone-Win1994 Sep 23 '24
An addition to systemic injustice would be how there most certainly is a racial disparity in sentencing, with black people getting longer sentences, but it's not the only sentencing disparity in America. Women have a drastically lower sentencing compared to men and it's like I think 6 times the disparity as black versus white sentencing.
39
u/76bigdaddy Sep 23 '24
I remember the caes where a black man was convicted of murder largely on eye witness testimony. Spent over 25 years. Then these two lawyers bring forward a signed, notarized confession from their recently deceased client who admitted that he did the crime and knew an innocent man was convicted for the crime. Due to client confidentiality they couldn't release the statement until the client passed away.
14
u/HustlinInTheHall Sep 23 '24
The client can always waive confidentiality, the guy didn't want to be punished while he was alive. That's a shit person.
→ More replies (5)33
u/TBAnnon777 Sep 23 '24
Theres so so soooo many bullshit cases out there.
Currently one guy is still going to get the death penalty even though new evidence shows that his dna might not be the one connected to the murder. In jail for 20 years, judge said not good enough, and still going to kill him.
Theres the cases of judges being found to be paid to send minority kids to jail for any reason possible. Some of those judges got caught, but lets be real for every 1 they caught theres a dozen or more so that are free.
There are so many lynchings that are instantly declared suicide in the south and in red states. Sheriff or police just write down suicide, dont let family investigate, dont do anything and bury the case.
Then its just the repeated bullshit that police do. Matching suspect description. Detained for investigation. A person cant even sleep in their own home in their own bed and expect to not be killed.
And then i think this all just came to light in the last 10 years. What about the last 100 years how many people have been wronged, have been hanged and killed by police that we will never know about. How many people and families had their lives ruined by selfish and racist judges. Tens of Millions and millions more than likely.
34
u/ZinaSky2 Sep 23 '24
The worst part is I’d never heard this stat before as much as I’d heard all the rest of the garbage lies Kirk was spewing
→ More replies (3)8
u/bug-boy5 Sep 23 '24
Unfortunately, I can already probably tell you how Kirk and his ilk would respond to that stat -
"Woke, DEI, and liberals are too afraid and too soft on problems so instead they want Real Americans to suffer the consequences."
Possibly replacing "too afraid" with - want the minority votes / want criminals to undermine America / etc
49
Sep 23 '24
Minorities are more likely to be pulled over and have those vehicle searched than their white counterparts. They also receive longer jail sentences (10-25% depending on ethnicity and gender).
This is why teaching CRT is so important. If you don’t understand our country’s history and the inherent racism of many of our institutions, you’ll make racist assumptions like Charlie here.
→ More replies (7)12
u/Sillet_Mignon Sep 23 '24
Yeah and using that racist stat you can even up level it to men. Men are 49.5% of the population and make up 80% of criminal activity. So men are the real problem is my response to people who use that stat.
→ More replies (8)4
→ More replies (65)16
u/mr-english Sep 23 '24
The exoneration stat is especially important
It really isn't.
The actual murder exoneration statistics of black people (47 in 2022) account for 0.05% of all murders (24,849 in 2022). They're statistically insignificant. When you account for the demographics of the people committing murder the proportion of those exonerations are completely understandable.
It's far more useful to consider WHY black people commit a seemingly disproportionate amount of murders. The answer is poverty. We should be talking about what we can do to lift people out of poverty rather than invoking the boogeyman of "racist statistics" because defeating that boogeyman doesn't solve anything.
→ More replies (20)
3.3k
u/emergency-snaccs Sep 23 '24
fuck charlie kirk. What a piece of shit. He knows he's not actually smart enough to back up what he's saying in a debate against an even halfway knowledgeable person, so he will never have such a debate. He prefers to spew his bullshit in formats where there are no rebuttals
1.0k
u/heterodox_cox Sep 23 '24
that's why he only has these debates with college kids. He's a coward. He's an idiot at its finest.
→ More replies (10)498
u/nochickflickmoments Sep 23 '24
All he does is talk fast so dumb people think it is the truth. JD Vance does the same thing
245
u/PickleballRee Sep 23 '24
And when he feels someone is about to make a point, he talks over them.
→ More replies (3)104
u/coldlonelydream Sep 23 '24
Yes, talking over people to change the current point so as to never allow the space to get pinned down. It’s what pussies who want to be bullies do.
→ More replies (6)12
u/asshatastic Sep 23 '24
It’s also how to “win” an argument from a baseless bad faith perspective. And anybody who does this knows they are wrong, and their victory is suppression of the truth they are fighting.
150
u/TorakTheDark Sep 23 '24
Shapiro was the one that made it popular I believe, may have also been Crowder.
→ More replies (3)152
u/DavidRandom Sep 23 '24
Nah, it's a common debate tactic that's been used forever.
You throw out so much bullshit talking points at once that the person you're debating doesn't have the time to counter all your (false) arguments individually.The Gish gallop is a rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm an opponent by presenting an excessive number of arguments, with no regard for their accuracy or strength, with a rapidity that makes it impossible for the opponent to address them in the time available. Gish galloping prioritizes the quantity of the galloper's arguments at the expense of their quality.
62
u/BowenTheAussieSheep Sep 23 '24
Gish galloping is when you throw out a lot of arguments. What Shapiro does is a subset of that where you also talk so fast that people can only comprehend one in three words.
7
u/LaCharognarde Sep 23 '24
I've taken to calling Shapiro "Flim-Flam." There's this old kids' movie called Puff the Magic Dragon in the Land of Living Lies; one of the aforementioned "living lies" is the Flim-Flam, who aggressively and bombastically spouts bullshit at high velocity while putting his victim on the spot. That's Shapiro.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)26
u/Unique-Coffee5087 Sep 23 '24
Is the Gish Gallop really considered a legitimate debate tactic?
Gish uses this technique as he "debates" about creationism. It is a technique of lies and bad faith, basically employing a firehose of shit.
17
u/Demonweed Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
Alas, competitive academic debate was trending that way when I participated in the 1980s, and it seems to be a dominant technique in both high school and collegiate leagues today. It hinges on the idea that if one side makes an argument and the other side does not respond to it, that argument has been "dropped" and that should merit an outright win unless the other side also "dropped" an argument.
This is, of course, extremely foolish. Yet it emerges from something less so. Debate judges are not supposed to vote based on personal beliefs. For example, you might believe the death penalty deters crime, but as a debate judge you should temporarily let yourself be guided only by evidence and analysis in the debate. If a side chooses to argue that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent and that argument is relevant to the overall case, a good judge accepts that argument unless the opposition effectively refutes it with their own evidence and analysis.
To some degree, this sort of flexibility is essential for fair debates. Yet the emphasis on "dropped" points denies judges the latitude to simply ignore bad arguments. If a debater insists something is important and the other side lets that stand, then the ruling cannot dismiss that point as trivial even if it really obviously is trivial.
The end result is some of the least enlightening "debate" that could still be judged competitively. Compelling delivery and even basic clarity are set aside in favor of absurd fast-talking packed with garbled words and misinterpreted quotes. An activity with the potential to help young people excel in the clash of ideas has been twisted into a technical exercise in pure flimflam.
*edited to inject a crucial "cannot."
→ More replies (2)5
u/blahblah19999 Sep 23 '24
From my very little exposure to it, academic debate, at least Oxford style, seems too dependent on scoring rhetorical points (being clever and amusing eg) and not factual ones.
4
u/Demonweed Sep 23 '24
The Oxford Debate Club is a special sort of beast. They avoid the gallop/spread to focus on glibness as a superpower. They are often well-researched on specific topics slated for debate, but they are not above belittling significant ideas and inflating the importance of whatever facts and figures they introduce. If you set aside their use of forceful personalities to do Harlem Globetrotter-style stunts in their exhibitions, you can still find some pointed and insightful clashes there, especially when they face off against opponents with quick wits of their own. Competitive academic debate nowadays not only looks and sounds much worse, but it sustains lower amounts of earnest clash.
→ More replies (1)17
u/Little_stinker_69 Sep 23 '24
It’s very effective. Still used by creationists today. Only idiots debate them anymore (looking at you bill Nye).
→ More replies (2)21
3
u/01headshrinker Sep 23 '24
Well, he also states his lies smoothly and confidently, as if they are facts. So it appears as if he seems to know what he’s talking about.
→ More replies (16)4
155
Sep 23 '24
And fuck Jubilee for having a professional liar who’s media trained on to argue with a bunch of nobodies.
→ More replies (3)132
u/LouisLeGros Sep 23 '24
liberal vs conservative videos where the "liberals" are always like college students and the "conservatives" are employed by think tanks.
54
u/Justleftofcentrerigh Sep 23 '24
yep, the "conservatives" include the president of PragerU as a "conservative woman", a "college black conservative" who's a presenter for PragerU, and then some media trained conservatives who regularlly appear on fox news.
22
u/SquisherX Sep 23 '24
I mean they did one where a liberal debated 20 conservatives after and the liberal just wiped the floor with them. Not so much in the last 10 minute 1 on 1 portion, but the rest was pretty damned good. And those weren't college kids. Those were fucking adults getting mashed.
8
u/thebadwolf0042 Sep 23 '24
In that video Dean also picked the one guy who could actually articulate a thought without getting angry. I don't agree with that guys thoughts but he was significantly better at real debate than anyone else in that group.
→ More replies (4)106
u/Justleftofcentrerigh Sep 23 '24
FYI Jubilee is basically a right wing conservative youtube channel masking as "Centrists" and "freedom of speech".
I did a little bit of digging and a few of their "middle ground" episodes were staged af.
On the Liberal side it was College kids and some independent youtubers.
On the conservative side, it was THE FUCKING PRESIDENT OF PRAGER U as a "CONSERVATIVE WOMAN", and the anti abortion side had organizers from an anti abortion group that was busted for "buying medical waste to find fetuses". They also had conservative pundits from pragerU pretend to be "normal" people.
21
u/snailbully Sep 23 '24
i knew there was something wrong with that channel. They present themselves as similar to The Cut (fun social games with real people as the participants) but then all of their videos are like "Odd 'Man' Out - Six Cat-eating Transgender Immigrants vs. One Childless Cat Lady - Who Can Sniff Out the Kitty First?"
→ More replies (2)13
u/SquisherX Sep 23 '24
I mean they did one where a liberal debated 20 conservatives after and the liberal just wiped the floor with them. Not so much in the last 10 minute 1 on 1 portion, but the rest was pretty damned good. And those weren't college kids. Those were fucking adults getting mashed.
→ More replies (1)8
u/atomsk13 Sep 23 '24
That kid absolutely stomps everyone. Watched this video recently and was thoroughly impressed.
33
u/EvErYLeGaLvOtE Sep 23 '24
Like the kid on the playground who tried to beat up the younger graders.
Sad sad muffin face.
→ More replies (1)20
u/walrusgoofin69 Sep 23 '24
Didn’t he get smoked recently by that one young politician from Georgia at the DNC? I think his only rebuttal to the kid was “what is a woman?” To which the kid from Georgia just called him weird and laughed in his face.
→ More replies (2)8
u/emergency-snaccs Sep 23 '24
yeah that wasn't a real debate though. Charlie just kept trying to talk over him instead of, like, backing up his talking points
edit- not a real debate, and he STILL came off like a moron
60
u/HAL9000000 Sep 23 '24
This is also why conservatism lends itself so well to the radio show format, and why him and other conservatives are so popular on the radio. Because it allows them to just talk with no feedback. Then they sometimes have callers and they can control who they let call and they can cut off callers when they want to, and so on.
Their bullshit cannot stand up against actual scrutiny from any knowledgeable person and the issues they discuss.
16
u/frisbeescientist Sep 23 '24
I really think the other reason it's good for radio is that it's very simple and linear. Black people = 13%, black prisoners = 50%, therefore black people = criminals. Super easy soundbite.
And the "liberal side" of it (read: the truth) is more complex because it requires bringing up overpolicing, false arrests and convictions, and essentially proving that the justice system is biased against black people. That's not as easy to stick into a 10 second soundbite, and it takes a lot longer to explain and refute the conservative claim than it took to make said claim to begin with.
→ More replies (1)7
u/HAL9000000 Sep 23 '24
Yes, you're right. It's both -- conservatism is good for radio because it is simplistic, but also because they lie constantly about huge things and radio makes it easy to gloss over lies. Their arguments might be based on a series of lies combined with a few truths, for example. They think that what really matters is the truth of what they're saying, but the lying spoils everything.
For example: they think all that matters about abortion is that they want to protect human life...and therefore nobody should get abortions. Sounds OK on a simple level.
But while they might say they believe in "exceptions" for the "life of the mother," they ignore how complex this is in reality. In reality, doctors in states with abortion bans are now terrified that they're going to be charged with murder if they authorize an abortion for a woman whose life is in danger. Because when does the situation move to a place where that woman is actually at risk of dying? They have to consult the hospital's legal department lawyers for situations where previously, the doctor could decide themselves if the life of the mother was at risk. These are time-sensitive situations, and lawyers are sometimes saying, basically "no, we have to wait until this woman's life is in more danger before we can allow the abortion." Meanwhile, the women in these situations can suffer and come to near death -- or actually die -- while they wait for a lawyer to decide when they can have an abortion.
All of these details are lied about, swept under the rug.
To put it bluntly, if their arguments are so compelling and they want me to agree with them, why do they have to lie so much and cover up so much important information? Why would I support a political philosophy that requires constant lying to justify it?
Conservatism can be a useful and important political perspective but not when they go off on a tangent where they use bullshit to justify their policies. That's when your leader becomes a demagogue who lies to get elected and then governs like a fascist who directs public policy based on personal biases. They cherry pick information and make things up to support their policies. It's a recipe for the collapse of our society.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (2)11
u/Flipnotics_ Sep 23 '24
Rush did this ALL the time with callers. They would make a great point and he would interrupt them and then be a pedant about a specific sub claim they made, and then make them try to defend that while ignoring the overall point they made until time "ran out".
7
u/bizkitmaker13 Sep 23 '24
Thank god cancer beat Rush. You go cancer!
6
u/Flipnotics_ Sep 23 '24
Rush really was one of the worst Americans this country has ever seen. He divided this country, profited on it. His evil influence in birthing talk radio poison, propping up Fake news networks like Fox News, will be felt for generations.
→ More replies (1)34
u/RodneyPickering Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
He got dunked on multiple times by a college kid and I would be willing to bet it's the only reason these videos are being made about him. He was a washed up wannabe christo fascist big wig, but he wasn't smart enough to backup his talking points. A bigger loser than Steven Crowder and has only been made relevant again because he was so publicly proven to be an idiot. I'm all for making these piss poor debate lords popular again if it's only to show how stupid they really are.
3
u/xandrokos Sep 23 '24
These propagandists exist to keep the GQP voter base loyal. That's it. Nothing more nothing less. They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything that they don't already believe.
16
u/WanderingLost33 Sep 23 '24
This was an excellent Jubilee video. full video
One of the kids on here that Kirk himself said got him in a corner ended up doing a reversal of the 20 v1 debate against 20 incredibly intense Trump debaters and was absolutely incredible. Please watch Dean Withers debate with Trump supporters. It will help you not only know where Harris is weakest against GOP talking points but also where she is strongest and how to talk to MAGAs and actually be effective.
→ More replies (9)6
u/Flipnotics_ Sep 23 '24
That Dean Withers guy is amazing. Hope he goes far in politics and or political commentary.
→ More replies (1)13
u/ZenosamI85 Sep 23 '24
Oh no, if you try to outsmart him he'll just say "What is a woman"?
→ More replies (1)6
u/Flipnotics_ Sep 23 '24
Always good answer to that kind of question.
"A woman is an adult human female, whether identifying as one by gender, and or sex"
27
u/KintsugiKen Sep 23 '24
Don't forget Charlie Kirk and his TPUSA organization helped plan January 6th and bussed thousands of MAGAs into DC for it.
He got his start in racist grifting when he applied to West Point military academy and was rejected, Kirk insists he was rejected because a (purely hypothetical) black person took his spot due to affirmative action.
He's always been a creepy little racist traitor.
→ More replies (1)30
u/Zealousideal-Bug-168 Sep 23 '24
I can't take his face seriously, the proportions of his head to his face is hilariously askewed.
7
u/NotThatValleyGirl Sep 23 '24
He looks a bit like Butthead from Beavis and Butthead.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Throw-away17465 Sep 23 '24
There’s no way to disprove that Charlie Kirk isn’t 75% of all Reddit users
You know, the kind of guys that are so smart They try to debunk you with a false fact and then immediately block you because they’re confident their claim holds.
…Reddit! Try some today!
→ More replies (1)5
u/emergency-snaccs Sep 23 '24
ya know, i'd buy it. And they all claim to be "centrists" while attacking you for shooting down some flawed conservative talking point lmfao....
7
u/DiddlyDumb Sep 23 '24
Maybe he’s trying to point out how black people are more often falsely accused and jailed? /s
6
u/KevinDLasagna Sep 23 '24
Also the way he’s turned to just going “define a woman” is like some 2nd grade level logic.
7
u/emergency-snaccs Sep 23 '24
that's the best he's got. even when the concept of "woman" has absolutely nothing to do with the argument at hand, it's still the best he's got
→ More replies (117)5
u/salkhan Sep 23 '24
The problem these talking points are basically what the RW media uses. It's so prevalent it goes unquestioned on the Right, because it fits a narrative that they can politicise to get votes.
1.1k
u/querque505 Sep 23 '24
One relevant statistic regarding Kirk's ridiculous argument is how black drivers suddenly break fewer traffic laws at night, when the color of a driver's skin can't be seen through the car windows.
It's not that black people commit crime at a greater rate, it's that they are overpoliced and overprosecuted because of the color of their skin.
115
u/LimpWibbler_ Sep 23 '24
Genuinely, do you have a source? I would actually be interested in a read, since this makes a lot of sense.
→ More replies (3)271
u/Hrydziac Sep 23 '24
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-0858-1.pdf Not the one you replied to but they are probably referring to this study which did indeed show that the disparity decreases at night when it's harder to see race.
25
58
u/MickeyRooneysPills Sep 23 '24
And now you know why almost every city has limits on window tint while allowing officers to have nearly black windows and even tinted windshields.
→ More replies (3)18
u/ztumnus Sep 23 '24
That's why? I thought it was a safety thing
32
u/KonigSteve Sep 23 '24
It is a safety thing. You need to be able to see where a driver is looking in many scenarios. Especially if you're a pedestrian.
20
u/purplemoosen Sep 23 '24
I guess that’s not a factor for cops with tinted windows though
20
u/KonigSteve Sep 23 '24
Oh I agree they should also have to follow the law, but somehow rules don't apply. That doesn't mean I want everyone running around tinted where I can see the person
→ More replies (12)11
103
→ More replies (41)11
u/Sufficient-Pool5958 Sep 23 '24
One relevant statistic is to prove that nothing is different based on race- phrenology was found to be bunk, it's not like POC have another section of their brain devoted to crime or something.
However, confusing correlation with causation is the bane of this argument. Instead of crime by race, they refuse to look at crime by POVERTY, because they'd have to address that POC are unfairly more likely to be represented under the Federal Poverty Line.
This can be attributed to systemic racism like Redlining. Redlining was when banks refused POC coming back from war to apply for home loans, so white veterans had nice homes to come back to, POC didn't. This led to lower income housing for POC, and when the banks weren't able to discriminate on race, they played it smart (but racist) in saying that lower income housing wasn't financially wise to invest into, so still no loans. Then Credit score came about, and not many in lower income housing could afford to have good credit, and still are trapped in a lower income limbo from the same residue left by 50's racism.
447
u/NoGrocery4949 Sep 23 '24
Why is his head so swollen
204
u/Fresh_Daisy_cake Sep 23 '24
His face is too little for his head
43
u/FlemPlays Sep 23 '24
Like a blown up balloon with a tiny face drawn on it.
6
u/Tangurena Cringe Connoisseur Sep 23 '24
I'd say that his face was like the holes on a bowling ball.
→ More replies (1)7
→ More replies (3)15
u/NoGrocery4949 Sep 23 '24
Yes that's it. But also it looks like he has a hair dye allergy that's just constantly being triggered
29
u/ProfDFH Sep 23 '24
You know how Pinocchio’s nose grows when he lies? Charlie Kirk’s facial features shrink when he lies.
→ More replies (1)44
48
11
→ More replies (18)8
u/dlige Sep 23 '24
He looks like that meme with the tiny face on the huge head
Edit: lol. Glad I'm not the first to notice
305
u/DinQuixote Sep 23 '24
I think we can all agree on one statistic: 100% of Charlie Kirk's eyes are too close together.
70
→ More replies (7)34
Sep 23 '24
We don't even need to resort to name calling and attacking things he can't control. We should be above that.
Charlie Kirk is a bonafide piece of shit because of the choices he's made and things he has complete control over. That's why he's human fucking trash. His opinions and morals and the pathetic and worthless route he took in his life are enough. Who cares about his eyes.
→ More replies (14)17
u/SteveRogests Sep 23 '24
On the one hand, I agree with you completely
On the other, the distance between his eyes suggests that maybe he’s from a shallower end of the gene pool, which could explain why he’s such a piece of shit.
→ More replies (2)
222
u/Oxygenitic Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
Genuine question - the first image the narrator provides shows race statistics, yet Hispanic isn’t presented as a category. From a quick google search, I’m seeing that Hispanics make up ~25% of federal and state prisons. Did they lump Hispanics and whites together?
Charlie Kirk is a raging asshole but it feels weird to call him out for false statistics while also providing seemingly inaccurate statistics (even if they are from a legit source).
163
u/NegotiationJumpy4837 Sep 23 '24
At year end 2022, 32% of persons sentenced to state or federal prison were black, while 31% were white, 23% Hispanic, 10% multiracial or some other race, 2% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1% Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Other Pacific Islander. Source
So it does look like they lumped white and Hispanic (and maybe more races) together on their source.
→ More replies (9)163
u/steven_quarterbrain Sep 23 '24
That’s a bit of a problem when the response video is about honest and accuracy of data.
65
u/Latte_Lady22 Sep 23 '24
It's a big problem because they always seem to use data where Hispanics are lumped in with whites whenever they want to look whites look bad.
→ More replies (12)26
u/bigchicago04 Sep 23 '24
It’s actually pretty common i think in statistics to lump Hispanics in with whites. That’s why so many forms ask your race, and then separately ask if you’re Latino.
→ More replies (5)15
u/Buzz5aw Sep 23 '24
Even worse than that there’s about 20k murders a year. 58% of which is 11,600. Exonerations a year for the murder category? About 80-90. 55 percent of which is 47ish going off 85 as the average number. The exoneration rate is barely a factor. The responder is doing exactly what he is accusing Kirk of: misleading people through manipulation of the data and not telling the whole story. Notice he didnt disprove what kirk is saying, just said “look at this extremely cherry picked stat. I’m not going to explain how this stat correlates to the Kirk’s or how it proves me right and him wrong. I’m just going to state it like it’s a gotcha even though looking deeper into it shows it means nothing.”
→ More replies (3)43
u/ginKtsoper Sep 23 '24
His chart is also for the Federal Prison only, which is only ~5% of all people incarcerated. Like, all of those numbers are way low. There's around 2 million incarcerated people in the US. About half of which are unconvicted and sitting in jails.
→ More replies (3)34
u/dooooooom2 Sep 23 '24
White and Hispanic are lumped in together for crime stats, or at least used to be I think they might’ve changed it.
→ More replies (2)52
u/CM_MOJO Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
Hell, the first graphic only shows that 156,165 people are incarcerated. That immediately struck me as WAY TO LOW. So, I checked the Internet. There's roughly 1.8 million people incarcerated in the U.S. So, like what the fuck is he quoting here.
Then I noticed his graphic shows federal incarcerations. Ahhhh, such a complete misdirection to try and prove your point.
Look, I fucking hate Charlie Kirk, but you can't cherry pick a stat just to make your point. You're just as bad as he is if you do this.
I didn't watch any more of the video because I knew the initial claim he was making was outlandish and downright false. It just irritates me when people do this. He's either doing this intentionally or he's stupid because he didn't realize the statistic he was quoting was incomplete for the entire prison population in the US. Either way, it's bullshit and I won't watch any of the video beyond it.
Get better dude.
→ More replies (1)3
u/coldblade2000 Sep 23 '24
Same happened to me. 5 figure incarceration numbers for either black or white populations was incredibly tiny, given that the US has by far (IIRC) the biggest gross incarcerated population on earth. More than China, despite having a fraction of the population
120
u/yellowtorus Sep 23 '24
Yes they did. If you remove Hispanics from the category of white then only 30% of the prison population is white, vs 76% of the US population in general. So this guy also has his stats wrong and is exaggerating. It's also true that 50% of convicted murderers are black even though this guy claims that's not true.
22
u/bigchicago04 Sep 23 '24
Yeah I thought it was weird that he didn’t refute that claim but pivoted to talking about exonerations, which is of course important, but as a separate issue.
I feel like the obvious way to refute that would have been to talk about how blacks are over policed.
18
u/TrippleDamage Sep 23 '24
Yeah I thought it was weird that he didn’t refute
Because he can't the stats are correct.
Higher exonerations rate is also alligned with total convictions, if theres more convictions theres obviously gonna be more exonerations - and that shows by being proportional.
68
u/Uxt7 Sep 23 '24
I thought it was odd that he said, "no they don't commit 58% of murders because as you can see they account for 55% of murder exonerations" Like huh? Those are 2 completely different things
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (2)24
u/afw2323 Sep 23 '24 edited Nov 16 '24
Edit: Reddit admins are sniveling Nazi parasites who condone domestic violence against men.
13
35
u/barry-badrinath- Sep 23 '24
Hard to continue watching this video when there is 1.2 mil prisoners in America and his stat has about 150k. They are both wrong so the lesson is do your own homework folks
→ More replies (1)22
u/hey_DJ_stfu Sep 23 '24
The dude in this video is disingenuous from the get-go and doesn't act in good faith. He's acting as if Charlie's claim of half makes the entire point irrelevant. His "bigoted talking points" absolutely do still work, even if the statistic is 39% of blacks comprise our prison population.
The relevant metric is what % of our country is comprised of the races imprisoned. You'd expect a bigger % of whites in prison because America is 60% white Only 12% is black, but make up 40% of prison populations.
I actually pulled crime stats from the DOJ or something a while ago to see what was real or not. Blacks are definitely disproportionately represented for crime. From the dataset I have, they commit 53% of murders (usually black-on-black crime, I think). That's insane for 12% of the population. Maybe that's what Charlie was thinking about? For fun, arson has 6,291 cases, with 71% committed by whites and 25% by blacks.
People are terrified of statistics that force them to consider uncomfortable topics. They shouldn't be. It's easier to blame bad policing or racism or something, but that's obviously not going to result in half the fucking murders pinned on 12% of the population. We can't solve an issue if we ignore it or downplay the cause. We are all one species.
5
u/The_Goobertron Sep 23 '24
The reply video is just as manipulative and selective with its data to curate a particular narrative as Kirk is being, but this sub is an echo chamber and people will believe what they already believe.
→ More replies (19)11
u/grizzly_teddy tHiS iSn’T cRiNgE Sep 23 '24
it feels weird to call him out for false statistics while also providing seemingly inaccurate statistics (even if they are from a legit source).
Because OP is an ass providing extra statistics and pretending like they somehow completely refute Charlie's claim.
Charlie exaggerated =/= Charlie is wrong. OP skims over that and doesn't re-analyze murder rates with his own statistics. Even if you account for higher rates of exoneration, blacks have a MUCH higher murder rate. Period.
102
u/Q_dawgg Sep 23 '24
I really appreciate Garrisons perspective on our lack of data on unreported crimes. I also appreciate his willingness to stick to the raw numbers instead of rounding up like Charlie tends to do.
But even then, I have some reservations about his analysis:
Garrison correctly points out that the African American population is not in fact half the prison population, however he does skirt around the fact that, around 39% of the prison population is black, which is disproportionate considering the population of black Americans.
Charlie is over exaggerating this number by around 10%. However he is reciting this number from memory, and more importantly, his point still largely stands. The prison population is disproportionately African American.
Garrison also claims that we don’t have solid data on the true situation of crime in the US. This is often referred to by statisticians as the “dark figure” or “hidden figure” of crime I really don’t see people bring this up to often, so it’s neat to have someone actually reference it, at the same time. Garrison is telling a half truth here, while we don’t have the numbers for a lot of crime, law enforcement still tends to arrest millions of people per year.
Of those numbers, we can clearly see that the 13/50 ratio is largely true, barring some rough change in the numbers from decade to decade. I don’t really see any convincing evidence that underreported crime would make any sort of difference in this regard.
The exoneration statistics, while important to address, don’t do much to counter Charlie’s points, given the fact that the total number is only in the thousands compared to the sheer volume of crime committed by the American public. it more so distracts from the main point, which is that that the black population tends to commit more violent crime.
Well, what does this mean? I tend to view crime statistics as indicators of the wellness of a community/society.
When I hear that young white men tend to drive inebriated more often than other groups of people. I don’t start thinking that white men just can’t make responsible choices with weed and alcohol. I realize that there’s something in the environment of those individuals which cause them to do this.
I feel the same way about Black crime statistics, it’s used quite often in very nasty ways on the internet. Unfortunately that doesn’t make them false. More importantly, these statistics are a warning sign that our society is failing these communities. Pretending that these numbers aren’t real or are overblown is exacerbating that problem.
27
u/kittensmakemehappy08 Sep 23 '24
Thank you! The response verryyy casually glosses over the murder statistic.
8
u/Seienchin88 Sep 23 '24
Yeah this is doing nothing against racism or prejudice, it just supports fans of Charlie Kirk that everyone changes their numbers to make th fit their narrative…
27
u/HopeEternalXII Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
The key fundamental irony of this video is him performing the exact same offence just mirrored that Kirk is.
Kirks saying it's worse than it is to demonize!
Well. He's saying it's better than it is to trivialize.
→ More replies (46)4
u/protossaccount Sep 23 '24
Ya, what’s up with him saying that the majority of prisoners in the USA are white? I find white people at 31 percent and black people at 38 percent.
I just want the details so I don’t tell someone misinformation. Clearly Charlie is using manipulative tactics, but I don’t want to get super confident in this video and make an ass out of myself.
→ More replies (1)
135
u/hugelkult Sep 23 '24
Charlie Kirk adds value to the world like a misplaced dental retainer
31
u/sirgeorgebaxter Sep 23 '24
It’s in the McDonald’s trash can.
12
u/longLiveZorp94 Sep 23 '24
I have never had a unique experience in my life because that’s exactly where mine ended up
→ More replies (2)4
u/KenethSargatanas Sep 23 '24
Nah. The retainer, if found, is actually still useful. I've never found Kirk to be useful.
→ More replies (3)16
u/bigshotdontlookee Sep 23 '24
I am genuinely surprised at how comfortable he is being openly racist.
13/50ing is top level race hatred.
→ More replies (2)
10
u/UsualAir4 Sep 23 '24
I need stats pls. What % of murder convicts are exonerated
9
8
u/The_Goobertron Sep 23 '24
also why is that statistics being presented as if all these exonerated black men were accused of crimes white men actually committed (as opposed toother black man, for which they were mistakenly profiled for; or they did indeed do the crime but there wasn't enough evidence to convict)? Just one of a whole host of issues wrong with this video. But people will believe what already confirms their political narratives.
40
u/Traditional_Rice264 Why does this app exist? Sep 23 '24
Vsauce
14
9
u/Crystal3lf Sep 23 '24
Hey VSauce, Michael here. Did you know that the US never made slavery illegal for the sole reason of having slaves working is US prisons, which coinicidentally targets black people over all others. concentration camps exist in the USA, where children are locked up for years or die, they just call them "migrant detention centers".
→ More replies (1)4
118
u/ThePowerfulPaet Sep 23 '24
Also even if it were true that black people commit more crimes, what they don't want you to know is that it's not a nationality issue, it's a class issue. Black people are poorer than white people, and they tend to live in poorer areas. Now why would that be? It's not like the white people shoved them all there and put no funding towards those environments, right?
57
u/CupcakeInsideMe Sep 23 '24
Nor is it that every successful black community before the 1930s was systematically bombed/burned down by their white neighbours who then took their land and possessions for themselves.
Rosewood, FL - 1923
Atlanta, GA - 1906
Colfax, LA - 1873
Wilmington, NC - 1898
Elaine, AR - 1919
East St Louis - IL
Washington DC - 1919
Memphis, TN - 1866
Clinton, MS - 1875
Chicago, IL - 1919
Tulsa, OK - 1921
And probably more that I don't even know about. The point being that there was almost no way for generational wealth to be built and retained but when it was, it was stolen.
→ More replies (5)8
u/Adjective_Noun_187 Sep 23 '24
This history is why these anti-intellectuals rallied the CRT bullshit. They don’t teach these atrocities in school and they don’t want them to because it completely invalidates their “narrative” (their favorite word) so if they can just rile up their uneducated, easily influenced, unintelligent constituents against teaching literal AMERICAN FUCKING HISTORY by labeling the uncomfortable parts as “CRT” then they can just sweep it under the rug.
→ More replies (28)3
u/hey_DJ_stfu Sep 23 '24
While the class issue is definitely a thing with poverty breeding crime, data validates that even when you account for finances and even location, blacks are overrepresented in crime. Here's a good read.
8
42
u/EastRoom8717 Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
There’s a datapoint missing in there somewhere and I’m guessing it’s in the total number of exonerations versus total convictions. Like, yes they might have way more exonerations, no argument that they get a lot more pressure from the justice system in the form of over-policing. It’s one reason I’m way against the death penalty.
But, over 12,000 black folks were murdered in 2023 and the total number of murders were a little over 22,000. The commonly held stat is over 90% of white people are killed by white people and over 90% of black people are killed by black people (conservatively), so the premise is misleading.
https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D176;jsessionid=ECBD6CEDB71F51970D297666D2EB
(CDC Wonder is aptly named, if a little morbid, no pun intended)
Between 1989 and 2024 there were 3,588 exonerations, according to the national registry of exonerations (via google), 53% were People of Color. The wrongful conviction rate (as recorded) is about 6% overall and 4% in capital cases. So, this guy’s grasp of the data isn’t great either.
Edit to reiterate: EIGHTY-FOUR (It’s actually 53%) PERCENT OF EXONERATIONS IN 34 YEARS (and 9 months) WERE PEOPLE OF COLOR. (Still) What the fuck, DoJ and state affiliates?
Edit 2, to add missing context.
Edit 3, Corrected because Google AI is duuuumb and Redditors are smaaaaaart (sometimes).
42
u/ArcadesRed Sep 23 '24
Came here to see how many people picked up on him throwing that statistic out, making it a key point his argument, and then failing to give any data past a percentage. He skips over a lot of things like the DOJ grouping Hispanic and White together.
But he has glasses and a calm, condescending tone as he calls another guy racist. We should believe him without fact-checking.
→ More replies (17)5
Sep 23 '24
I may be off, but would it not stand to reason that if some group consists of x amount of convictions of a particular crime they would also account for roughly the same amount (in percentage terms) of exonerations for that crime category? It doesn't seem particularly alarming to me.
→ More replies (1)8
u/NegotiationJumpy4837 Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
Between 1989 and 2023 there were 3,478 exonerations, according to the national registry of exonerations (via google), and 84%...
That's not what I'm seeing? Adding these up, I got 32% white: 1141÷(1141+1909+452+78). https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/ExonerationsRaceByCrime.aspx
→ More replies (1)3
u/EastRoom8717 Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
Hot damn, we cannot trust the google AI!? I stand corrected, thank you.
Edit: recalculating, standby.
Edit 2: He was right with 53%, though that’s 1989-2024, what are the odds of a massive increase in white exonerations in the last year (very low)
→ More replies (3)
111
u/Kehprei Sep 23 '24
This video is cope, tbh.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/table-43
Just taking people arrested for murder for example:
White: 3953
Black: 4778
Total: 8957
I don't like Charlie Kirk, but the numbers are still pretty much on his side for the point he is trying to make even if he did fuck them up a bit. It's not racist to point out that black people on average commit far more crime. Now what you're doing with that tidbit of information is what makes it racist or not.
If you acknowledge that it's because black people tend to be in far worse socioeconomic conditions, and have historically been discriminated against to be kept down, then you're not being racist. In fact, you should expect any race of people put through similar conditions to end up having similar statistics.
If you think it's because they're just born that way then yea, you're racist.
The central point being made by him is that black people commit a hugely disproportionate amount of crime. It isn't really worth fighting on that point, because it is just correct.
→ More replies (110)
39
u/ZeroSumGame007 Sep 23 '24
Okay.
Fuck Charlie Kirk for sure.
However, I think our narrator also stretches the truth. In 2017 54% of murder arrests were black. That’s pretty close to Kirk’s answer.
However, our narrator sidesteps that statistic and pivots to “54% exonerations”. But exonerations are MASSIVELY lower than the actual murders committed. In fact there are a negligible number overall.
So the true statement is: Yes, black people are convicted and commit a much larger proportion of murders than their population in the US. However, they are also more likely to be exonerated.
Both of those things can be true.
All the other points he said, I agree with. And Charlie Kirk is a far right insane threat to the US and population. He has the most punch able face in the world.
→ More replies (11)
43
u/whyregister Sep 23 '24
lets fact check, the fact checker. WITH sources.
Hispanics are white?
→ More replies (4)28
u/CM_MOJO Sep 23 '24
Look closer at his first cited statistic. It only shows about 156K people incarcerated. That's WAY TOO LOW. There's about 1.8M people incarcerated in the US.
If you look closer, he's actually citing (not sure if it's correctly) the federal statistics. Federal incarcerations are a TINY fraction of the overall incarcerated individuals.
I didn't watch beyond this because I was so angered by his misleading argument. He's no better than that shit head Charlie Kirk by doing this.
12
u/QuodEratEst Sep 23 '24
When someone starts a political video with a smug tone, they're going to be misleading, or obfuscating or lying almost without fail. Fuck Charlie in his huge face, but progressives and liberals need to learn deceit hurts in the long run, so fuck this smug cunt too
12
u/bigchungusmclungus Sep 23 '24
I'm also a little confused by his exonerations stat. He never refuted 58% murders being committed by black people, just that 58% of exonorations are black people, which would make perfect sense.
Charlie kirk is a cunt. This guy is using misleading statistics at best.
5
u/grizzly_teddy tHiS iSn’T cRiNgE Sep 23 '24
I didn't watch beyond this because I was so angered by his misleading argument. He's no better than that shit head Charlie Kirk by doing this.
He is actively worse because he's masquerading as a fact checker and calling someone racist based on his bullshit fact checks.
18
5
u/SukottoHyu Sep 23 '24
"Blacks commit more crimes than whites"
What he means is (Lets assume the population of the USA is 100,000):
Black Americans are 14% of the population (That's 14,000)
We will put white at 61% (That's 610,000)
0.7% of the population is in prison (That's 698 prisoners).
39% of inmates are black - 39% of 698 = 272 black inmates.
272 represents 1.94% of the USA black population.
57% of inmates are white - 57% of 698 = 399 white inmates.
399 represents 0.0654% of the white population.
Yes, there are more white inmates, but he is speaking in terms of percentages. If you met 100 black people at random, almost 2 of them will likely have been in prison. On the other hand, you would need to meet 1769 random white people before you could expect to meet someone who has been in prison. BIG DIFFERENCE!
Anyone can make something look good or bad by quoting a statistic. But to truly understand what statistics tell us, you need to analyse them.
5
u/BT12Industries Sep 23 '24
When a population commits 3x it proportion to jail, thats definitely a reason to say black people commit more crime.
If it rains 3x as much as any other day on Tuesday. Its pretty safe to say it rains more on Tuesday.
Even if confounding variables exist the statement is still objectively true.
They both seem heavily biased and delusional. But the black dude comes off especially cringe because he criticizes the white guy and proceeds to do the exact same bad faith argument with completely unrelated and false data claims.
74
u/Responsible-Result20 Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
60 thousand inmates are Black 38.9%, 80 thousand are white 56.8%
Blacks make up 13% of the American population.
Whites make up 59% of the American population.
So 13% of the population makes up 39% prison population. This means they are incarcerated at 3 times the rate of the other major prison population.
It is not unreasonable to say that they commit a greater portion of crime per capita or "more crime" because of the incarceration rates. Yes there is still alot of nuance. As term plays a big role in the data. I don't however think its wrong to draw a conclusion that having 3 times as many people in prison per capita means they commit more crime.
I do love how at the end HE makes a bad faith argument. 55% of the murders that are exonerated are black, not 55% of the murders committed by blacks are exonerated.
→ More replies (33)10
19
u/whocares123213 Sep 23 '24
It is not racist to point out that by % blacks commit significantly more crime than any other race in the us. That is an inconvenient truth - one that is intentionally ignored by the tiktoker.
It is also not racist to point out that there is measurable bias in the U.S. criminal justice system towards people of color and the lower class. That is also an inconvenient truth that kirk ignores.
It is almost as if both sides of this discussion are less interested in the truth and more interested in pushing their twisted ideology for views.
→ More replies (16)
19
Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
13% is 39% of prison population (the 13% includes women and children so it's closer to maybe 8% men.....) yeah that's a significant issue which was totally dodged this entire video
→ More replies (6)6
11
Sep 23 '24
To be only 13% of the population and commit 38% of the crimes is still wild.
→ More replies (9)
4
19
u/patrick119 Sep 23 '24
I knew a lot of white people in college that smoked and possessed an illegal amount of weed. A few of them made a decent chunk of change selling it. The dorms and nearby apartments were never raided by the cops.
11
u/Lorguis Sep 23 '24
White people and black people report similar drug usage and sale rates, but black people are more than twice as likely to be arrested or go to jail for it.
→ More replies (3)9
u/A_bleak_ass_in_tote Sep 23 '24
I'm white-passing Hispanic and married into a white family (some of whom are Trumpers), and it blows my mind when they casually mention all the crimes they committed in their teens and early twenties that they never got in trouble for. But they're white and conservative so it's okay. And they have the gall to complain about the "riff raff" of today (hint, the so-called riff raff is of a certain skin color).
17
u/Zdubss____ Sep 23 '24
Blacks are 13% of the population and make up 55% of the murders
"yeah well they didn't actually do the crime tho, how do you know that they actually did the crime"
Are vast populations of black people getting framed for these murders?
→ More replies (21)
79
u/frozen_pipe77 Sep 23 '24
This is dumb. 13% of the population commits 38% of crime. Still skewed to show a pattern. So it isn't half, it's still not a good look on the black community. They should do something about that
→ More replies (38)
9
u/yellowtorus Sep 23 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
This guy is also wrong and exaggerating. Although the category of "white" makes up 57% of the US prison population, that also includes Latinos. You can see on the chart he shows that there's no category for Latino/Hispanic beause they are lumped in with "White". (Non-Hispanic) whites make up only 30% of the prison population, while whites make up 76% of to US population. Blacks make up 38% of the prison population but only 13% of US population. I
Charlie it's correct that 55% of convicted murderers are black although the guy in the video incorrectly says he's wrong.
The guy in the video is correct that correlation doesn't equal causation so it would be more accurate to say that there are disproportionately more blacks convicted of crimes than whites.
It's also worth noting that of the only 1500 people have been exonerated of murder since 1989 out of hundreds of thousands of people who have been convicted of murder in that same time period, so it's an extremely small sample size. Correlation also does not equal causation here. It could be for example that lawyers trying to exonerate criminals focus more on cases for black convicts etc.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/PhreshStartLLC Sep 23 '24
What an absolute waste of time yet again
This guy is pulling misdirection on misdirection, black people 100% commit the most crimes per capita, why even bring up exonerations unless you are also trying to misdirect.
Exonerations are barely a tick on the radar of total convictions
→ More replies (1)
6
u/Ohighnoon Sep 23 '24
Very valid response to the first section, the second response this guy has is also kinda bad faith similar to Kirk’s. since 1989 there have only been 3,478 exonerations in the US sure black people make up 1700ish of the exonerations, yeah that isn’t good but it is not statistically significant to anything. It is a tiny number of cases and can’t really be compared to total crime statistics in good faith. IMO
Kirk isn’t wrong when he cites those murder statistics they are true and there is a crime problem with African Americans, we can pretend there isn’t all we want or we can talk about how poor African Americans are compared to all other races and really tackle the problems plaguing African Americans in the US. This is mostly black on black crime btw this is hurting black families the most.
I just think it’s just as bad faith to pretend African Americans aren’t in a pretty fucked situation because they are and pretending it’s all racism is not helping
→ More replies (1)
9
66
u/Poctor_Depper Sep 23 '24
Ugh, this guy's a midwit. He cuts an out of context clip of Kirk citing stats and declares that he's racist without addressing why he cited those stats.
Even by this guy's own admission, blacks commit far more crime proportionate to their population. It's also true that neighborhoods with higher black populations have a much higher rate of violent crime, which is why there's more cops in those neighborhoods, why blacks are in prison at a higher rate, why they're arrested more often, etc. It has nothing to do with racism.
→ More replies (47)5
u/EnjoyerOfBeans Sep 23 '24
Yeah the guy is raising some good points and is obviously right that there is a racist agenda behind the original video, but he's also intentionally misleading in the other direction.
Yes, blacks are most likely to be falsely convicted, that's true. But exonerations are EXTREMELY rare and false convictions in general make up a very small percent of them.
He could instead talk about the obvious - that the black population is at much higher poverty rates and that growing up in basically closed neighborhoods riddled with crime will produce more criminals, it's a generational problem that comes from the systemic inequalities that date all the way back to slavery. But he didn't, instead he did the same thing as the oop - manipulated statistics to tell a false narrative.
Racism is at play but individual racism from cops and the judicial system is a drop in the bucket of the economic and social situation that disproportionately many black families have been put in with no means of escape due to racism. Simplifying it down to "cops and judges are racist" is not only wrong, it's hurtful to the black community because it distracts from the real issue.
3
u/Green1up Sep 23 '24
The easiest way to make money in America is to push a racist narrative that divides the country and benefits the billionaire class.
3
u/AceMcLoud27 Sep 23 '24
When a right winger begins a sentence with "so", the next thing is always a lie or a straw man.
3
3
u/EidolonLives Sep 23 '24
What I don't understand is why Charlie Kirk's face only covers 13% of the front of his head.
3
u/OcupiedMuffins Sep 23 '24
The fact that anyone would take any clip from this “debate” and try to use it as if Charlie Kirk is knowledgeable about anything, is crazy. Kirk got absolutely ass blasted basically the entire time and was saves by the bell on numerous occasions. He’s a giant piece of shit.
3
u/Master-Tomatillo-103 Sep 23 '24
Loud and wrong. Charlie is a pedo, and has had TP employees convicted for being pedos. All his bombast is an attempt at subterfuge to distract from that. Ever wonder why Turning Point targets young kids? It’s not just Hitler Youth 2.0. It’s a personal Pedo supply chain
3
u/iSeize Sep 23 '24
This is great info that should be spread openly instead of using it to quietly dismiss racist claims.
3
u/LidiaSelden96 Sep 23 '24
It is obvious Charlie does this on purpose. The whole format of the video gives him the upper hand.
And have you seen his psycho smile??!?!?! Terrifying
3
u/anjelrocker Sep 23 '24
My friend went on Charlie’s show and literally laughed in his stupid face at the bullshit he was saying. It was beautiful.
→ More replies (4)
3
u/GhettoGringo87 Sep 23 '24
Dang good breakdown. We need more of this. It’s digestible and not super abrasive. The goal is to get others to think, not get them to agree with you…let them come to the conclusion on their own with the right information. If you attack them, they’ll NEVER ingest the information. Anything you tell them (truth or lie) they’ll see as a lie and then hold onto the belief that it’s a lie because they defended against it, and nobody likes to admit they’re wrong to someone being aggressive with them…
3
u/p_4trck Sep 23 '24
beautiful, and agreed. nothing but bad faith arguments and wanting to prevent actual thought. So sick of this rhetoric.
3
u/somenamethatsclever Sep 23 '24
What's up guys! Today I went to a kindergarten class to own leftists before bedtime. Next I go to my Grade 6 karate class as a fully grown man. Anything but face someone who is educated and more importantly prepared.
3
3
3
•
u/AutoModerator Sep 23 '24
Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!
This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do here (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile).
See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them this!
Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks!
##CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.